On the brisk Monday morning, the House of Representatives and Senate convened in a joint seating. The agenda? To see the newly-formed Cabinet reveal its future forward policies, a necessary requirement in line with Section 162 of the aberrant constitution.
Following consensus from the whip line, the two-day debate was allocated a combined 30 hours, split sternly through the parties. The opposition was given half a day plus four hours, followed by an equal allocation of a five-hour slot to the Cabinet, government-side parties and senators.
Nearing 10 o’clock in the morning, the honor fell on Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin to present the government’s policy guide to the anxiously waiting Parliament, sharing printed copies of this statement with the delegates present.
Bearing the concerns of the nation on his shoulders, Srettha emphasised the urgent need to elevate the struggling Thai economy, staggering under the weight of the pandemic and global economic decline. His proposed antidotes included short-term stimuli and long-term skill-development of the workforce, aiming to counter sluggish expansion, damp exports and burgeoning household debt.
Among these restorative measures, raising the nation’s economic tempo was at the forefront. A 10,000-baht cash bonus, an organized tackling of agricultural, business and personal debts, a reduction in energy costs and restructuring of energy usage patterns, a boost in tourism income, and constitutional revisions for strengthened democracy constituted the priority list of the fresh administration’s recovery schemes.
While the introduction of these policies set a determined tone of the government’s vision, the opposition was quick to criticize and point out certain discrepancies.
The deputy leader of Move Forward, Sirikanya Tansakul, critiqued the lack of a solid objective, timeline and direction in the proposed plans. Drawing a comparison between the policies and a Global Positioning System (GPS), she expressed that an effective policy is like a GPS; it should showcase the plans for the forthcoming years and the direction that the government ought to take. “But with these new policies, it seems Thailand is lost” she concluded.
Tansakul went on to draw parallels between the Pheu Thai-led administration and its predecessor, the Prayut Chan-o-cha government. She suggested that the new coalition was performing even worse on policy declaration, accusing it of holding a vague strategy. She attributed such a disjointed policy direction to the Pheu Thai’s fear of not being able to fulfill all their promises, or the potential threat from military-supported parties within the coalition.
Adding to the criticism, Jurin Laksanawisit, leader of the Democrat Party, mirrored Tansakul’s sentiments, asserting that the policies sounded like an embellished speech devoid of any concrete course of action. Laksanawisit further pointed out that several pre-election promises of the Pheu Thai were noticeably missing, including the basic graduate salary of 25,000-baht and a 20-baht fare for Skytrain journeys.
Both opposition leaders also raised a pertinent issue regarding the funding source of the ambitious 10,000-baht digital wallet scheme, leaving the newly-formed government with a significant query to resolve.
Be First to Comment